babylon5fandomcom-20200225-history
User talk:ThatRebel17
Welcome Hi, welcome to The Babylon Project! Thanks for your edit to the User talk:BlueResistance page. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Radagast83 (Talk) 05:06, May 28, 2012 Citations for Warlock Class Thanks for adding your own new citation, and for pointing out the new citation that the unidentified editor added. I'm always hoping that the Babylon Project Wiki will keep developing in quality at the same time that it's developing in quantity. -- BlueResistance 14:47, May 28, 2012 (UTC) Now that I've had a chance to look at the references that you and the unidentified editor listed, I see that there are still a number of problems. 1) The two references to the ISN Warlock board link to the whole board, without pointing to any specific post--the writer needs to directly cite specific evidence to back up their claims, without forcing a reader to spend time digging around to find it. 2) Even though it is more detailed, the ISN Warlock board looks like more fan speculation, rather than something official--something taken directly from an authorized work, or written by somebody involved with the production of B5 episodes, novels, comics, etc. 3) Calling the weapon a "G.O.D. laser" still doesn't make sense on the Warlock, even if it is the same weapon: "G.O.D." means Global Orbital Defense, and the Warlock isn't an orbital defense satellite. "Dual lasers," "pulse cannons," "particle beam cannons," whatever the weapon itself is would be a more appropriate label. Once the weapon is taken off a G.O.D. satellite, it ceases to be "G.O.D." I will wait until I hear back from you before making any revisions (I can't send the same message directly to the unidentified editor, unfortunately). If I don't hear from you in a few days, I'll assume that you agree and I'll go ahead. -- BlueResistance 21:31, May 30, 2012 (UTC) :Fine, I'm convinced, and I also see that one can't link to the specific pages on the Warlock board, so no problem there, either. If I have a chance to make any revisions to the Warlock page in the next few days, I promise not to remove the information you've provided. -- BlueResistance 12:16, May 31, 2012 (UTC) Citations I appreciate your edits, as I'm sure every other editor on this site. However, Fan sites should not be considered official references. They can be secondary references, if they cite their sources. - This is taken directly from the The Babylon Project Canon page. We try to pride ourselves on only providing information derived directly from the shows, novels, comic books with additional information provided from JMS produced material, such as USENET postings, etc. which often state or clarify canon are considered official. Fan sites are fine secondary sources, but they *have* to site their sources. Well, the problem here is that I almost never see B5Tech site any such sources - we've spent years removing such unattributed material from this site because there simply wasn't any information that could be verified as to whether some random guy simply made up the ship stats or if they were actually derived from official sources. Certainly if official sources can be directly linked to that provide this information we'd be all ears. It might be arguable if B5Tech is more accurate than this wiki, but I'm not sure who's making that determination since there's virtually no attempt on that site to source any of the information. It could have been from "Shadow Dancing" or it could have been made up by some guy in Saint Petersburg. As for the links to the "Warlock Technical Discussion Group", could there please be more specific attribution? Linking directly to the board is not helpful, especially since it means that the person checking out the source would need to dig, sifting through sourced material that may be questionable (random posters). These aren't the same as linking to a different page on the same site that is using direct quotes from Tim Earls. I don't want to go ahead and simply delete the text, at least not without first reaching out and seeing if it *can* be sourced elsewhere. Radagast83 05:51, June 5, 2012 (UTC)